JW.org Says Apostates are "Mentally Diseased"

[Srecko Sostar]

@JW Insider you shared fine thoughts and showed your awareness and understanding of objections and questions other people accented and saw as serious items that need to be put on table for discussion and challenged. That is one of reason i like to read your comments which are respectful to other people, even when you are in a disagreement with them, about subject.    

55 minutes ago, JW Insider said:

I hope you can see that, even with JWs out of the picture, you could probably accept this entire situation as a possible, and even normal, Christian congregation.

What you described, can be also applicable for many human activities. For example, people who have common interest in producing food and living in some rural area, joined together. Looking for ways how support each other and care about each other and shield each other from outside bad influence, greedy merchants, natural disasters and so on. Well, in technical way, things can be looked as same. People, in that small community, will be facing inside problems and making regulations, rules and laws. 

How far will they go? To proclaim such rules as "God given"? Would they stick to rules at any cost or would be, as TTH said, "adaptive to modern technology". Or, not only to technology :))) 

Of course, we always have fear and potentially difficult situation in both directions - to stick with old things, as well to accept new and unknown. Burden is heavier, because in all this we (they) want to PUSH God as reason, motive and result.

[Patiently waiting for Truth]

@JW Insider Yes I'm angry and I'm confused, as are others that trusted the JW Org for years, only to find out things that the GB / Org does that cannot surely be approved of by God. 

Unfortunately you use that word apostates again, because JW's are brainwashed with that word by GB / Elders.  I do wonder is there ever a meeting in a KH where that word isn't mentioned, either from platform of congregation. Can you not just accept that some of us are seeking TRUTH. 

Quote "Of course, I've brought up some of these same challenges myself, ...."  "I believe that we need some doctrinal adjustment"

" I'm not exactly defending the GB position against your challenges. "    (I come to bury Caesar not to praise him).  

" Yes. The GB dictate to the congregations and, unless the dictate is seen as unconscionable or unscriptural, the members of the congregations are expected to obey. Naturally, this can go too far,... "  (and it does go to far hence people complaints).

" GB's request to be trusted while admitting that some of the teachings and processes are bound to be mistaken now and then.. "

I believe the Watchtower comment was that the "GB are not inspired, so they can 'make mistakes and err' "

I picked up on this because the word 'err' can mean make mistakes or deliberately do wrong. 

But they would have written 'make mistakes and make mistakes'  so the word 'err' in this case must have been meant to deliberately do wrong.  Add to this that you are saying that "some of the teachings and processes are bound to be mistaken now and then.. "  

So if your GB are the F&DS  FAITHFUL AND DISCREET SLAVE,  why would God or Christ give them false information, or why would they be so indiscreet as to 'run ahead' of God given information. They admit to not being inspired, we agree on that much, surely they should be, as you would say, 'spirit directed' ?   Do you thing the 'overlapping generations' is spirit directed ? 

By the way, in your hypothesis, I didn't see the mention of God's holy spirit playing a part even once. 

I think I'm actually 'offended' (that not being exactly the word I'm looking for but.) by the words Governing Body. I hate when people use that to describe the first century overseers. Governing surely means to be in charge of, whereas those at the top should not be 'lording it over the congregation of God'. I would think a different title would be more appropriate.  What is your opinion on that ? 

"guardians of doctrine." didn't the Catholic church once use that expression ? So much so that they didn't allow people to have the Bible.....  But JW's are allowed to have their own Bibles and to do private study. However if JW's come to their own conclusion about certain scriptures, they must not share that with other JW's or it may be seen as 'causing a division in the congregation'.  I find it funny, sorry.  It's like, yes read the Bible yourself but only believe what we say. 

It is now just after 12 noon here in UK. I need lunch and coffee (just to show you that I'm actually human). I could write tons more, such as the GB being 7 of the 8 American, whereas it could be more men from different countries. Or , such as the GB now being famous earth wide, but then telling the rest of the Anointed to not even contact each other. The GB saying only they are the F&DS, where as it was once the whole of the Anointed being the F&DS.  Thelist goes on.

And the fact that you are @JW Insider   A JW but giving out info about the GB and it's Org, so you cannot be completely happy with it yourself. Physically in but possibly spiritually out. Have a good day. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[JW Insider]

4 hours ago, 4Jah2me said:

Yes I'm angry and I'm confused, as are others that trusted the JW Org for years

There's trust as in the type of trust you have in a trusted friend, and blind trust in someone who turned out not to be what you thought they were. I don't think of the organization as the religion we trust in. True religion is helping people who we can best help - materially, spiritually, emotionally -- with the proper unselfish, loving motivation, and therefore without spot from this world. An organization, i.e., a publishing house, researchers, coordinators, a legal department, etc., are just tools that a group of sincere Christians might be expected to utilize for a more efficient method of getting the word out in the midst of a complex world. It's not something to trust blindly as if it is Christianity, or even as if it represents true Christianity.

(These are my opinions, of course.)

I think that a lot of persons get baptized as Witnesses with a kind of naive view that the organization is more than it really is. This might even be true of new GB members who are asked to join that particular committee of elders. Perhaps they are surprised at the difference between reality and expectation. But I think they are better prepared, since they have already worked at various levels of the organization.

I didn't mean to call myself JW Insider here. I intended to use "The Bible's Advocate" but when I joined someone was making a claim that was easily clarified by someone who had worked directly with members of the GB before. I had worked with members of the GB from 1976 to 1982. I worked directly for a member of the GB from about 1979 to 1982. I planned to tell some of the stories from that period, and therefore called myself "JW Insider" and allowed it to stick, in spite of some unintended implications.

But I mention this because if a person can work with (and around) some of these same persons for a few years, then they are already prepared for an experience that is quite different from the expectation of the average Witness. They have seen them in a bad mood, they have seen them curse and yell, they have seen them make mistakes, they have seen their prejudices, seen them connive, possibly even be dishonest. I have seen all these things among a couple of them, but I'm obviously talking about exceptions to their usual conduct and demeanor. And for MOST of the members that I knew, I never saw any of these things, they always came across as perfect "saints." But I would not have been surprised to learn of a different side, because of what I had seen in a very few others, even if I only saw it rarely.

I also had an advantage of an uncle who was a circuit overseer, and a grandmother and grandfather who seemed to know all the "big shots" from headquarters. (My great grandfather was a Chicago Bible Student who traveled with Russell and spoke at conventions with him.) But most of these relatives were apt to say things like, "Jehovah puts half of us here to test the other half," when referring to some of these same persons. Before going to Bethel, I heard a Circuit Overseer evoke laughter from another by asking, "Can you imagine how the Apostle Paul would have blown up if anyone told him he had to keep all these numbers [records] on everyone?"

So, I probably come at some of these human imperfections from a different perspective than most. I'm hardly surprised at anything. My grandparents who knew Rutherford thought he was sleazy. My table head at Bethel had a personal "hatred" of him. But Russell himself was apparently dishonest, too, sometimes. Both Russell and Rutherford weren't defined by these errors, because their greater goal was to spread the word about the Kingdom hope amidst expectations of the imminent end. And now, we've gotten rid of most of that chronology rhetoric and spend more time highlighting the positive, life-changing aspects of the message. And I see a great value, like a pearl, in the overall set of teachings we stand for. And I do tend to fall back on how the Israelites had asked for a king and got a range of kings, from evil to good, but none perfect, of course.

I am out for the rest of the day without much access, so I won't spend much time revisiting issues already covered. And I know the answers won't be satisfactory anyway. I should also say that I hope you don't lose your spirituality. Many exJWs do. Also, I wouldn't make too much of the fact that I used the word "apostate" when referring to the challenges you offer. I don't think of you as apostate as long as you are in a stage, as you describe, of anger and confusion. That could be understandable. I would hope you could see that there is a beautiful baby in that bathwater before you throw it all out.

[Patiently waiting for Truth]

I've always believed, and continue to believe, that only the Anointed are the body of Christ. 

[Patiently waiting for Truth]

9 minutes ago, John H Slaughter said:

That’s understandable. That’s what I’m saying, you’re not alone with your belief. JWinsider (JW) believes it, Srecko (exJW) believes it, and Witness (exJW).

 

You are among the same type of friends that have the same belief not in accordance with scripture. You’re doing fine. There is no need to be angry here.

 

1 Corinthians 12:12-27 New International Version (NIV)

 

Unity and Diversity in the Body

 

12 Just as a body, though one, has many parts, but all its many parts form one body, so it is with Christ. 13 For we were all baptized by[a] one Spirit so as to form one body—whether Jews or Gentiles, slave or free—and we were all given the one Spirit to drink. 14 Even so the body is not made up of one part but of many.

 

Hence I feel the scriptures were / are written for the Anointed, not for the earthly class. 

I feel that only the Anointed should fully understand scripture as they are 'one' with Christ. 

The rest of us are just the other sheep.    I like the scripture about 'Ten men clinging to the skirt of a Jew' 

The 'Jew' being the Anointed class, the ones clinging being the earthly class. 

[Witness]

49 minutes ago, John H Slaughter said:

You are among the same type of friends that have the same belief not in accordance with scripture. You’re doing fine. There is no need to be angry here.

What?  I'm sorry YOU are wrong.  There was a time when the organization clearly taught that the Body of Christ is comprised of the anointed ones.  It can still be found on their web page.  

https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1200021176

I might be wrong, but it could be that Allen is back.  

 

[James Thomas Rook Jr.]

You can change the spots on a leopard, but you can't change its breath.

[Witness]

38 minutes ago, John H Slaughter said:

Then you are among friends. Witness which I suspect is you,

 

49 minutes ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

You can change the spots on a leopard, but you can't change its breath.

You are so right. 

[Patiently waiting for Truth]

Witness which I suspect is you,  

Is this rubbish really going to start again. I was following this blog / forum long before I chose to join it, and one reason I didn't join earlier was reading all the horrid stupidity of people saying, x was y, and you must be he, and telling one person that they had three different user names just to give themselves up votes etc etc, 

It is obviously people that are losing a debate / discussion, or people who feel hurt by someone's comments. BUT it does no good to the blog as a whole. Just wastes everyone's time. 

 

[Arauna]

9 hours ago, Witness said:

There was a time whe

Living in the past again?  Now some of them also believed in the Trinity before becoming JWs. Why not go that far back?  

[Witness]

9 hours ago, Arauna said:

Living in the past again?  Now some of them also believed in the Trinity before becoming JWs. Why not go that far back?  

Let me help you out with that link I had provided from your organization's website.  

https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1200021878#h=1:0

"Also called 144,000; Anointed; Body of Christ; Bride of Christ; Chosen Ones; Elect; Holy Nation; Israel of God; Kingdom Class; Little Flock; New Creation; New Nation; Royal House; Royal Priesthood; Sanctuary Class; Sons of Levi; Spirit Begotten; Spiritual Israel; Spiritual Sons)"

[JW Insider]

On 11/17/2019 at 2:14 AM, Arauna said:

Living in the past again?  Now some of them also believed in the Trinity before becoming JWs. Why not go that far back?  

Actually, @4Jah2me and @Witness are right in this case.

*** w09 10/15 p. 5 par. 10 “Be Aglow With the Spirit” ***
. . . the “other sheep” are not part of the composite body of Christ . . . .

And @Witness is right that this is a difference between the Watchtower teaching and the "theology" that Allen Smith has claimed to believe. And if Allen Smith thought this was right you can best believe that it will also be defended to the n^th degree by: @Bogdan11 @John H Slaughter @Alithís Gnosis @DespicableME, @alvi languore insanabili @Grey Reformer @Tom Henry etc., etc., etc.